AMD: Speculation, Rumors, and Discussion (Archive)

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by iMacmatician, Mar 30, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ike Turner

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,884
    Likes Received:
    1,756
    Kyle's "love" affair with NVIDIA has been going for more than 15 years ... met him once and surely enough he is even more annoying in real life..as a matter of fact at the time (Comdex 2001) whenever Derek Pérez (NVIDIA's head of PR) was around, Kyle would constantly be glued to him as if his life depended on it,, fun times.. So take whatever he says negatively about somebody or something with a huge grain of whatever you want...
     
  2. SimBy

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2008
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    135
    Sounds like a repeat of the whole Nano ordeal. Both AMD and Kyle need to grow the f up and start acting professional.

    As for the whole Intel deal. Supposedly its the same thing Intel has with Nvidia now. Birds are saying Intel is dumping Nvidia and licensing from RTG. It could also be negotiation tactics to get a better deal from Nvidia.
     
  3. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    The editorial asserts something much more drastic than IP licensing. I don't have a firm grasp of the scope of Intel's graphics resources to know how referencing its recent layoffs would figure into it.

    IP licensing is also a major initiative cited by Lisa Su, so licensing graphics IP is not necessarily a sign of the the RTG going rogue.
     
  4. silent_guy

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    Huh?
    AFAIK Intel and Nvidia had just a patent licensing deal. Which is basically a "we shall not sue each other" agreement.
    Apparently AMD and Intel have been negotiating a similar deal. But that doesn't mean Intel is going to be using or not using any of the GPU technology: there are thousands of those parents. They were already using and violating them anyway (and vice versa.) This is just a legal CYA maneuver.
     
    RecessionCone and DavidGraham like this.
  5. Razor1

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    NY, NY

    Yeah they aren't really using any nV IP that I know of in there IGP's right now, its just a precaution just in case if

    Its one thing if they are late by two Q's this time its just a month, its probably just what AMD planned for to begin with.
     
    #1885 Razor1, May 27, 2016
    Last edited: May 27, 2016
  6. Razor1

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,232
    Likes Received:
    749
    Location:
    NY, NY

    The part about Raja thinking to go to Intel, I am pretty sure that is real, I have heard that before. Also I was surprised to see AMD put Raja at the head of the RTG as he is not their typical leader type, he is an engineer at heart and that is what he does best, not really operations. I was thinking AMD was changing their views of how their leaders to be doing things, but it could have been politics.
     
  7. xEx

    xEx
    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    398
    In my opinion the future is bright for AMD and Nvidia but specially for AMD. Why I say such thing? Well there is a whole new market that demands a very high processing power and that has the potential to grow into thousands of millions: VR(also AR), and AMD is in a privilege position when they can supply both parts of the hardware; Nvidia can make GPU but would stay short on CPUs, Intel can make CPU but would stay short on GPU, AMD can make both of them.

    Will AMD know how to translate their advantage into a lead in market-share? I don't know, I can't know such thing. What I'm saying is that AMD has the potential to do so.
     
  8. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    I haven't seen pressure on the CPU side as acute as it is on the GPU side when it comes to desired performance and what is readily available.

    As far as banking on VR, I guess time will tell if it can mature and provide a self-sustaining base with multiple healthy competitors, or if those counting on the hype have it throwing blowing up in their face.
     
  9. xEx

    xEx
    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    398
    I'm sure it will At least on the VR side, on AR side we will need to advance and move from HoloLens type of device to Google Glass type of device before it could be popular. On the VR side we are still figuring out when and how to use it but the advantage in some areas are a totally game changing thing. Imagine a [strike] porn movie[/strike] simulator(race or flight) on VR...the immerse experience could be totally incredible(this will kill the entry multi monitor market(so sorry AMD eyefinity)) Role games may be also but I'm not sure yet. As i said we have to learn how and when to use it but once we learn those things I think the VR market will explode.
     
  10. Osamar

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    40,00ºN - 00,00ºE
    Please, do not call me a jinx, but I see a VR bubble exploding in a pair of years. We need CHEAP Hololens/Google Glass type devices for VR (not AR).
     
  11. Genotypical

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2015
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    11
    the whole exclusives for headsets thing will definitely reduce its growth. headsets need to be like monitors. Cheap is not necessarily needed, just universal standards. VR companies need to stop thinking of themselves as console manufacturers since they only make a screen (complicated screen as it is, still a screen)
     
  12. xEx

    xEx
    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    398
    No we don't. AR and VR are too similar but very different things. they have different targets, and markets.
     
  13. trinibwoy

    trinibwoy Meh
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Messages:
    10,429
    Likes Received:
    427
    Location:
    New York
    Yep, market fragmentation is going to be an issue unless one of the players makes a break through. That's less likely to happen as there's already well established platform fragmentation - mobile, console, PC, etc.

    Not to mention the uphill battle of convincing people to strap a big, clumsy device to their face.
     
    pharma likes this.
  14. Frenetic Pony

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2011
    Messages:
    324
    Likes Received:
    84
    The hype is perfectly justified, but the problem is it's not just a "One and done" technology. It's an entire suite of things, with a new way of developing software, and everything will take time to mature. The Rift is already outdated simply because it didn't ship with hand matching controllers, which nigh everyone loves and thinks is way better than using a traditional controller. Which isn't too mention a thousand other things (improved controllers, improved headsets, other tactile feedback, etc.) that might prove viable and popular.

    Then there's how to market the things. Once you actually get one on most people, with the right software (Tilt Brush or something rather than just a stupid VR port) they tend to love it. But it's not a thing that just sells itself naturally because it's expensive, you've probably never experienced good VR before, and you look like a dork with a headset on.
     
  15. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,750
    Likes Received:
    2,518
    Don't think the VR hype will take off, just like 3D glasses, Multi-Monitor setups and motion sensors before it, it's gonna be niche.
     
    BRiT likes this.
  16. Orion

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    47
    VR sure, but I wouldn't say the same about augmented reality if the tech can be miniaturized enough and provide adequate resolution.
     
  17. xEx

    xEx
    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    398
    Doubt VR would be a niche, unless 3D glasses it actually adds to the experience. and completely replace the multi monitor setups in almost all cases.
     
  18. Esrever

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2013
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    298
    Multi monitor setups are a niche. Unless VR becomes way cheaper it will continue to be a niche product. Unlike other technology like consoles, tvs and even PCs to an extent where everyone in an household can enjoy together so the cost of entry could be justified, VR basically requires everyone buy a headset just to start. The prices of headsets need to drop to below $200 for it to become anything more than a niche product.
     
    Razor1 and BRiT like this.
  19. xEx

    xEx
    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    398
    Price is not a problem. I heard to the same over speakers "500 bucks is way over what people can afford" but that is not true at all. We spend much more money in digitals things like video cards, tvs, and specially smartphones. The problem is not the price people will buy anything if they feel they "need" it and it is worth the money.

    This is the same thing people said to steve jobs "600 dollars is too much for a cellphone no one will buy it" but only now we can see who was right, right?
     
  20. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,062
    Likes Received:
    5,013
    Except you can buy speakers for far less than 500 USD, hence why so many speaker are sold and it isn't a niche. And you can buy smartphones for far less than 600 USD (my current one cost me 30 USD, but many makes are available for ~100-150 USD), which explains why they finally pushed out feature phones as the dominant mobile phone in developed nations. And the iPhone wasn't a 600 USD lump sum to end consumers, it was X dollars + a 2 year subscription at Y per month.

    Look at a common household item that is now ubiquitous. The Microwave. When first introduced to consumers they were extremely expensive and extremely niche. Had the price never come down significantly it would have remained extremely niche.

    Price does matter. I've seen people pairing 650+ USD graphics cards with 150 USD monitors because they don't think it's worth spending more on a display. I've seen people spend 1000+ USD on a display and the use a 100-150 USD graphics card because they don't think it's worth it to spend more on a graphics card.

    The higher the buy in price on a technology the lower its consumer penetration will be. If the price is too high and thus consumer penetration too low, then the product will remain a niche product. In the above example, Microwaves can now be had for under 100 USD, hence they are in almost every household. Graphics cards and LCD displays can be had for 150 USD or less, hence most people with a computer have one.

    Going back in time a bit. Laser Discs had significantly higher quality than VHS, but also a laser disc players were significantly higher price than VHS players. It remained a niche product. OLED TVs are significantly better than LCD TVs but will remain niche until the price comes down drastically. Plasma TVs were also significantly better than LCDs but remained niche due to their price.

    We have no idea what price point can push VR over the hump into gaining momentum into becoming a more mainstream prospect. 600+ USD likely isn't it. I don't think 400+ USD will do it either.

    200 USD or less might get enough people to try it. At that point will there be enough content and enough compelling content that people will continue to ignore the inconvenience of having to strap something onto their head that basically isolates them from the world and the people around them?

    We've seen with 3D non-interactive content that even something as lightweight as sunglasses combined with TVs that were the same price as non-3D TV was still to inconvenient to keep people interested in 3D media.

    VR has a chance as it involves both interaction and much more believable 3D. But it also comes with a device that is far more inconvenient and precludes easily sharing the experience with those around you. All current devices also feature visual anomalies and inconsistencies that would likely hinder mass adoption.

    For VR to have a chance, it doesn't just have to get cheaper, it also has to get better. It also needs to be easier to share the experience with those around you. And, IMO, it needs to not isolate you from your surroundings and the people around you. Unfortunately VR can't really do that last bit. So it has an uphill battle.

    It's a novelty, a really nice and impressive novelty. But I don't think it has mass consumer appeal.

    Regards,
    SB
     
    Esrever, Kej, AlBran and 3 others like this.
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...